SITA RAM (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. versus BHARAT SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS & ORS.

Citation: [2019] 13 S.C.R. 323 · Decided: 17-09-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.M. KHANWILKAR · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
323
SITA RAM (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.
v.
BHARAT SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 8179 of 2016)
SEPTEMBER 17, 2019
[A. M. KHANWILKAR AND AJAY RASTOGI, JJ.]
Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act,
1950 – ss.161, 166, 167 – Appellants-original tenure holders (since
deceased) of Plot No.2902 sold it to late father of respondent nos.10
& 11 vide sale deed dtd. 24 Jan. 1973 – Father/Grandfather of
respondent nos.1-8 was tenure holder of Plot Nos.2863 and 2888,
he exchanged his plots with plot no.2902 owned by father of
respondent nos.10 & 11, by exchange deed dtd. 2 March, 1974 –
Father/Grandfather of respondent nos.1-8 filed application for his
name to be recorded for Plot No.2902 –Appellants raised objection
to the validity of sale deed dtd. 24 Jan. 1973– Consolidation Officer
held that the exchange was permissible only with permission of the
Assistant Collector in terms of s.161 of the 1950 Act which was not
obtained, hence father/grandfather of respondent nos.1-8 is not
entitled to be recorded as Bhumidar under the consolidation
proceedings – Eventually, High Court inter alia held that it was the
State Government who could apply for cancellation, if affected by
the exchange deed but, it was not open to be questioned by the
appellants– On appeal, held: Under the pre-amendment scheme of
the 1950 Act, any transfer in contravention of the Chapter referred
to u/s.166 which includes s.161 as well, were not to be automatically
void but voidable – As consequence u/s.167, a suit was to be filed
by the Gaon Sabha or the land holder, within six years from the
date of illegal transfer –  In the present case, exchange deed was
executed on 2 March, 1974 – Period of limitation for filing the suit
expired in March 1980 – Indisputedly, no suit was filed either by
Gaon Sabha or any land holder for ejectment as envisaged u/
s.167(1) – Under the pre-amended scheme of the 1950 Act, the
consequence for non-compliance of seeking permission from the
Assistant Collector, would in no manner take away or divest the
   [2019] 13 S.C.R. 323
323
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
324
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 13 S.C.R.
rights/interest of the parties inter se conferred under genuine sale
deed dtd. 24 Jan.1973, executed in favour of father of respondent
nos.10 & 11 – Said sale deed is nowhere related to the exchange
proceedings, initiated at later point of time – Appellants do not have
any locus standi to claim benefit of the defect in the exchange deed
dtd. 2 March 1974 – Conclusions of the High Court in the impugned
judgment does not call for interference – Uttar Pradesh
Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 – s.9A(2) – U.P. Zamindari
Abolition & Land Reforms Rules, 1952 – r.338 – U.P. Land Laws
(Amendment) Act, 1982.
U.P. Land Laws (Amendment) Act, 1982 –  When not applicable
– Discussed.
Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD : 1.1 It emerges from the pre amendment (U.P. Act
No. 20 of 1982 w.e.f. 3rd June, 1981) scheme of the Uttar Pradesh
Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 that any transfer
made in contravention of this Chapter referred to under Section
166 which includes Section 161 as well were not be automatically
void but voidable and therefore, as a consequence of alleged void
transfers under Section 167, a suit was required to be filed by the
Gaon Sabha or the land holder, as the case may be, within
limitation of six years from the date of illegal transfer as indicated
in Appendix III annexed to Rule 338 of U.P. Zamindari Abolition
& Land Reforms Rules, 1952 but after the U.P. Act No. 20 of
1982 amended w.e.f. 3rd June, 1981, the law has changed and
every transfer made in contravention of this Act became void in
view of Section 166 and in consequence of void transfer, the
subject land is deemed to have been vested in the State
Government by operation of law free from all encumbrances, and
sub-section (2) of Section 167, authorises Collector/Competent
Authority to take over possession with the use of force as may
be necessary. In the instant case, the exchange deed was executed
on 2nd March, 1974 indisputedly without permission from the
Assistant Collector provided under Section 161 and its
consequence was embedded under Section 167 of the Act, 1950
authorising the Gaon Sabha or the land holder to file a suit for
ejectment within a period of six years from the date of alleged
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
325
illegal transfer which in the instant case had expired in March
1980 much prior to the U.P. Act No. 20 of 198

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.